In-Reply-To: <cbff8327-c1d6-6357-ce40-edf97698cc7f@lojban.org>
References: <lw7S1t00H56Cr6M01w7Tpd>
 <cbff8327-c1d6-6357-ce40-edf97698cc7f@lojban.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Karen Stein <comcaresvcs@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 19:49:33 -0500
To: llg-board@lojban.org
Message-ID: <5CBAD62B-AAEE-4668-84EF-A80E4F8AED1F@gmail.com>
X-Spam_score: -2.0
X-Spam_score_int: -19
X-Spam_bar: --
Subject: [llg-board]  2017 Meeting
X-BeenThere: llg-board@lojban.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: <llg-board.lojban.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/options/llg-board>,
 <mailto:llg-board-request@lojban.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/private/llg-board/>
List-Post: <mailto:llg-board@lojban.org>
List-Help: <mailto:llg-board-request@lojban.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-board>,
 <mailto:llg-board-request@lojban.org?subject=subscribe>
Reply-To: llg-board@lojban.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5154847506891069591=="
Errors-To: llg-board-bounces@lojban.org

--===============5154847506891069591==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----JCYU7RZ7ZO1P6YDJZAWEFJZ304V400"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

------JCYU7RZ7ZO1P6YDJZAWEFJZ304V400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8

I agree with skipping the 2016 meeting entirely.

Therefore, in case it's necessary, I move that the 2016 Meeting be skipped so the 2017 Meeting may start in the early months of that year.

On December 12, 2016 11:35:53 AM EST, Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
>On 9/20/2016 4:07 PM, Riley Martinez-Lynch wrote:
>> coi jbopre
>>
>> I would like to start a discussion about how and when to hold the
>2016 annual meeting of the members. I’m bringing the question first to
>the board, since we’re empowered to take action on this question, but
>would also be glad to bring it to the members list if the sense of the
>board is that we would benefit from wider discussion before taking
>action.
>>
>> Given the drawn-out nature of the last meeting, I am renewing my call
>to change the way that we conduct the business of the meeting. I would
>like to suggest that we draw up the agenda for the meeting well in
>advance so that people have a chance to debate any action items before
>the meeting starts.
>>
>> If we do this, I am confident we can conduct the business of the
>meeting in a few hours over IRC or Slack. I would like to see the
>meeting scheduled in such a way to maximize convenience to the members.
>I think we should propose several times and poll the membership to
>decide which time.
>>
>> If it turns out that the time chosen isn’t possible for any member, I
>would be glad to personally follow up with that person to ensure that
>they have a proxy to represent their positions. Since the meeting would
>be focused on business rather than debate, what they would be proxying
>would be mostly limited to formalities: The casting of votes on issues
>identified in advance.
>>
>> If we start this conversation now, I expect we can arrive at an
>agenda by early November, which would allow us to both start and finish
>the meeting in the appropriate calendar year.
>
>So much for early November.
>
>> Please let me know your thoughts:
>>
>> 1. What do you think about front-loading the debate on the agenda and
>executing business separately?
>> 2. What days or times do you think might allow the most members to
>participate in a real time meeting?
>> 3. What would you like to see on the agenda for the upcoming meeting?
>
>
>It isn't clear that anything has been decided, and we have not
>announced 
>anything to the members.  Scheduling the meeting to start during the 
>holiday season is counter to Riley's preference to maximize convenience
>
>to members.  Thus it looks like we won't be starting a 2016 annual 
>meeting anytime during 2016.  The 2015 meeting lasting until June 2016 
>was bad enough.
>
>I will suggest that we simply forgo having a meeting called the "2016 
>annual meeting".  It can't be any worse than the handwave that we 
>approved for the corporate filing, and if we start a 2017 meeting early
>
>in the year and use at least some of Riley's suggestions to speed
>things 
>up, we might finish the annual meeting less than a year after finishing
>
>the prior meeting, even while technically skipping a year.
>
>Then we need to actually decide what the "2017 meeting" will be and
>when 
>it will start, and then get announcements out asking for agenda 
>items/motions etc.  And then we can accomplish what Riley thought would
>
>be done a month ago.
>
>We need an actual motion to decide, and maybe more than one.
>
>
>mi'e lojbab
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>llg-board mailing list
>llg-board@lojban.org
>http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-board

------JCYU7RZ7ZO1P6YDJZAWEFJZ304V400
Content-Type: text/html;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html><head></head><body>I agree with skipping the 2016 meeting entirely.<br>
<br>
Therefore, in case it&#39;s necessary, I move that the 2016 Meeting be skipped so the 2017 Meeting may start in the early months of that year.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On December 12, 2016 11:35:53 AM EST, Bob LeChevalier &lt;lojbab@lojban.org&gt; wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On 9/20/2016 4:07 PM, Riley Martinez-Lynch wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> coi jbopre<br /><br /> I would like to start a discussion about how and when to hold the 2016 annual meeting of the members. I’m bringing the question first to the board, since we’re empowered to take action on this question, but would also be glad to bring it to the members list if the sense of the board is that we would benefit from wider discussion before taking action.<br /><br /> Given the drawn-out nature of the last meeting, I am renewing my call to change the way that we conduct the business of the meeting. I would like to suggest that we draw up the agenda for the meeting well in advance so that people have a chance to debate any action items before the meeting starts.<br /><br /> If we do this, I am confident we can conduct the business of the meeting in a few hours over IRC or
Slack. I would like to see the meeting scheduled in such a way to maximize convenience to the members. I think we should propose several times and poll the membership to decide which time.<br /><br /> If it turns out that the time chosen isn’t possible for any member, I would be glad to personally follow up with that person to ensure that they have a proxy to represent their positions. Since the meeting would be focused on business rather than debate, what they would be proxying would be mostly limited to formalities: The casting of votes on issues identified in advance.<br /><br /> If we start this conversation now, I expect we can arrive at an agenda by early November, which would allow us to both start and finish the meeting in the appropriate calendar year.<br /></blockquote><br />So much for early November.<br /><br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> Please let me know your thoughts:<br
/><br /> 1. What do you think about front-loading the debate on the agenda and executing business separately?<br /> 2. What days or times do you think might allow the most members to participate in a real time meeting?<br /> 3. What would you like to see on the agenda for the upcoming meeting?<br /></blockquote><br /><br />It isn't clear that anything has been decided, and we have not announced <br />anything to the members.  Scheduling the meeting to start during the <br />holiday season is counter to Riley's preference to maximize convenience <br />to members.  Thus it looks like we won't be starting a 2016 annual <br />meeting anytime during 2016.  The 2015 meeting lasting until June 2016 <br />was bad enough.<br /><br />I will suggest that we simply forgo having a meeting called the "2016 <br />annual meeting".  It can't be any worse than the handwave that we <br />approved for the corporate filing, and if we start a 2017 meeting early <br />in the year and use at least some of
Riley's suggestions to speed things <br />up, we might finish the annual meeting less than a year after finishing <br />the prior meeting, even while technically skipping a year.<br /><br />Then we need to actually decide what the "2017 meeting" will be and when <br />it will start, and then get announcements out asking for agenda <br />items/motions etc.  And then we can accomplish what Riley thought would <br />be done a month ago.<br /><br />We need an actual motion to decide, and maybe more than one.<br /><br /><br />mi'e lojbab<br /><br /><br /><br /><hr /><br />llg-board mailing list<br />llg-board@lojban.org<br /><a href="http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-board">http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-board</a><br /></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>
------JCYU7RZ7ZO1P6YDJZAWEFJZ304V400--


--===============5154847506891069591==
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

--===============5154847506891069591==--