From jkominek@miranda.org Mon Jan 02 09:38:25 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Mon, 02 Jan 2006 09:38:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from miranda.org ([216.93.242.2]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EtTdV-0004ZF-96 for llg-board@lojban.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2006 09:38:23 -0800 Received: (qmail 16512 invoked by uid 534); 2 Jan 2006 10:38:19 -0700 Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 10:38:19 -0700 From: Jay F Kominek To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: Two organizations Message-ID: <20060102173819.GL29659@miranda.org> References: <20051219070640.GB3514@ccil.org> <43AB97DF.8030703@lojban.org> <20051226195753.GB5289@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20060102042644.GJ4087@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 48 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jkominek@miranda.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 11:22:25AM -0500, Matt Arnold wrote: > > I was thinking about something along the lines of UAE ( > > http://www.uea.org/info/angle/an_kio.html ). I still think something like > > that is necessary in a long perspective, and beneficial in a shorter > > perspective. > > That link is very informative. I have been asking for a few weeks > "what is the informal organization?" To put the exact same thing in > another way, "what would it _do_?" There came no answer, only shrugs. Because the whole point is the informality. This discussion, like the first one, is absolutely bizarre. Go do something with Lojban, with other people. You will then be an informal Lojban organization. (In so far as "informal organization" makes any sense in the first place!) This strange need for everyone to formally define what their informal organization will do before it can exist simply demonstrates to me that it probably is not an appropriate idea for the sort of people who are interested in Lojban. That said, more power to anyone who actually wants to go do something. I personally suggest that the board cease all discussion of this "informal organization" stuff. If a group of people wish to create another organization, and some board members are interested in participating, great. But as it stands: Robin doesn't want to run it. I think we're incapable of defining it. Arnt doesn't want it official. Bob is probably too busy to do much with it anyways. We can better spend our time on things that the LLG itself will do. After all, we're the LLG board, and we're beholden to its members. Not the future-members of another organization, even if they are a superset of our own members. > As a model to work from, I have copied and pasted the text below, and > re-written it to apply to Lojban. (Let's change the name later.) > Esperanto is a "movement" with "activists" and I doubt Lojban will > ever be that. > [ text excerpted ] On cursory inspection, it appears you have retyped Article 2, Sections 1 and 2 of the LLG bylaws. -- Jay Kominek