Received: from localhost ([::1]:36944 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1bKT3B-00040j-7G; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 09:18:17 -0700 Received: from mail-lf0-f50.google.com ([209.85.215.50]:36243) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1bKT32-0003zi-Nb for llg-board@lojban.org; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 09:18:14 -0700 Received: by mail-lf0-f50.google.com with SMTP id q132so138080259lfe.3 for ; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 09:18:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5Jo0y+EQM/BTVGgg6i2Kx/j5twXEl69WgJ254g6IBOI=; b=iTFzN82jhkvTQVWA5WxCZNcsTDmMPcDP0z0m85hJOp7y068TRGPM1uJEgRFfC/cSea Zh/n4KuJqSIHA76q+V3W+3kTL3zbOZsxPD3XkCadinzmedxbqc5S7YpomHv0j7vfHQKS qRoIy6Tuh4lzu/lFOQj58vSM7KWyJyCiRknEfsgV/YVLsMzWHE1EwsspAz7S2ugfb+L2 +3HG2AM8K3wsyavevHDt2RatwI7h5QbsHu53XkmI16qI+cZ7yfY0y8l6l5ZWnjkIjer7 DNz6TUKBGT61qTOH7AszDEbIFqulGk56+6C8K3KLTJjVv/6020o7RA8pe+uVvZrVvmvQ 13WQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=5Jo0y+EQM/BTVGgg6i2Kx/j5twXEl69WgJ254g6IBOI=; b=YqLdayztAatiHsO1J5TiEbQSvwGq/drm08mLrtb+1/g+tI4ZdXcllQ/b1ChHQIItiS sn4Q39HS+aTe0U+r2L36p2snDyW03hQukWFYmZ8Jxi7h1cJYMP8ytCZZLawUHOk9OkyD 4vWeTj2UWMSRHAbrTeibHlghslrJ7srXeQa3t4/DgkPusEPkJjQXivwmgyu9K+GiiEeW aIeSanWxiMFtDM4HG/yRmecZhLkuXcUKehp4Eywcn4VCtw3bBblYG+95eq8HB0UwOMLs fI414zwLSsjlbwqqfouxYBhoXICWv+RiRzjoTCHhrUWBYXlXOs+RqzpFFN2kINhglLLo 4Mfw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKnqMCfJquQ8dzqJOD/diPM+Y6difYMR6Rb78bVPvTaqevHemNNPzzdph7edCEq9qNoRT7faCgZZ6uwqg== X-Received: by 10.25.219.130 with SMTP id t2mr4983970lfi.26.1467735481231; Tue, 05 Jul 2016 09:18:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.24.164 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jul 2016 09:17:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51A8CA25-94D2-432B-8D01-ECCE1AD80CF0@gmail.com> References: <822daa99-6878-512e-6793-0d3a5f0fd70a@selpahi.de> <51A8CA25-94D2-432B-8D01-ECCE1AD80CF0@gmail.com> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 19:17:21 +0300 Message-ID: To: llg-board@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 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 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3993425562019364729==" Errors-To: llg-board-bounces@lojban.org --===============3993425562019364729== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c066852fbb02d0536e5cb8b --94eb2c066852fbb02d0536e5cb8b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2016-07-05 18:23 GMT+03:00 Riley Martinez-Lynch : > I agree that LLG has not been =E2=80=9Cvery useful=E2=80=9D for a long ti= me, but in saying > that, I don=E2=80=99t mean that it can=E2=80=99t be useful. To the contra= ry, the role that > it should be filling is not filled by any other entity, and probably can= =E2=80=99t > be. > > For example, one vital function of LLG is to recognize BPFK and its work > as custodian of the language. It=E2=80=99s LLG=E2=80=99s nature as a rule= s-bound > institution, governed by its members, that it makes it possible for the > work products of BPFK to be incorporated into the norms of the community. > Note that one active IRC resident expressed their clear opinion that they prefer anarchy. So not that LLG can be perceived negatively some think it shouldn't simply exist. "LLG recognizing BPFK" for me sounds like an English proverb "claw me and I will claw you". And another opinion (from la su'o da): why after all BPFK or its equivalent should be recognized by any legal entities at all? Why can't BPFK be independent? Community can decide whom to listen. Some people prefer using only CLL (first edition) and they feel happy. Also I wouldn't like the community (primarily newcomers) to form an opinion that LLG is somehow hijacking Lojban having no rights over it (indeed how can one own a language?) and have done over the last years literally nothing to morally justify such hijacking? On the other hand, a recent example is when a person wanted to join LLG most likely not realizing that it's not a place where Lojban is spoken. Personally I suggest that LLG pays more attention to 1. its goal (from the Bylaws) not limited to Lojban 2. administrative and 3. technical issues of Lojban like that of printing books, deciding on important software and providing hosting for it. All other issues that sound politically like "we need a leader who will lead us into the bright future of transhumanism or whatever" should in my opinion be abandoned. I don't think we need loud slogans. And I do think we only need the work being done. --94eb2c066852fbb02d0536e5cb8b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= 2016-07-05 18:23 GMT+03:00 Riley Martinez-Lynch <shunpiker@gmail.com= >:
I agree that LLG has not been =E2=80=9Cvery usefu= l=E2=80=9D for a long time, but in saying that, I don=E2=80=99t mean that i= t can=E2=80=99t be useful. To the contrary, the role that it should be fill= ing is not filled by any other entity, and probably can=E2=80=99t be.

For example, one vital function of LLG is to recognize BPFK and its work as= custodian of the language. It=E2=80=99s LLG=E2=80=99s nature as a rules-bo= und institution, governed by its members, that it makes it possible for the= work products of BPFK to be incorporated into the norms of the community.<= /div>

Note that one active IRC resident expressed the= ir clear opinion that they prefer anarchy. So not that LLG can be perceived= negatively some think it shouldn't simply exist.

"LLG recognizing BPFK&= quot; for me sounds like an English proverb "claw me and I will claw y= ou".=C2=A0

And another opinion (from la su'o da): why after all BPFK or = its equivalent should be recognized by any legal entities at all? Why can&#= 39;t BPFK be independent? Community can decide whom to listen. Some people = prefer using only CLL (first edition) and they feel happy.

Also I wouldn't l= ike the community (primarily newcomers) to form an opinion that LLG is some= how hijacking Lojban having no rights over it (indeed how can one own a lan= guage?) and have done over the last years literally nothing to morally just= ify such hijacking?
On the other hand, a re= cent example is when a person wanted to join LLG most likely not realizing = that it's not a place where Lojban is spoken.

Personally I suggest that LLG p= ays more attention to=C2=A0
1. its goal (fr= om the Bylaws) not limited to Lojban
2. adm= inistrative and=C2=A0
3. technical issues o= f Lojban like that of printing books, deciding on important software and pr= oviding hosting for it.

All other issues that sound politically like "we nee= d a leader who will lead us into the bright future of transhumanism or what= ever" should in my opinion be abandoned.
I don't think we need loud slogans.
= And I do think we only need the work being done.
--94eb2c066852fbb02d0536e5cb8b-- --===============3993425562019364729== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ llg-board mailing list llg-board@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-board --===============3993425562019364729==--