From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jan 02 12:41:01 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:41:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EtWUF-0006M6-Mn for llg-board@lojban.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:40:59 -0800 Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 12:40:59 -0800 To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: Two organizations Message-ID: <20060102204059.GE4087@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-board@lojban.org References: <43AB97DF.8030703@lojban.org> <20051226195753.GB5289@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20060102042644.GJ4087@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20060102173819.GL29659@miranda.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060102173819.GL29659@miranda.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 From: Robin Lee Powell Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 54 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 10:38:19AM -0700, Jay F Kominek wrote: > 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. I believe this confusion is my fault: what I want is a *non-corporate* Lojban organization. I've been using "informal" to describe this, but that's really a mistake. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!" Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/