From matt.mattarn@gmail.com Thu Jan 05 09:10:26 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:10:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.193]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EuYd3-0000rh-KD for llg-board@lojban.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:10:24 -0800 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 4so3476155nzn for ; Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:10:19 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EJKrpF+B61Fc4q19KuqADMJnwNim/abxT0BL34Bcyc6bMDvTe3NPmBrkAimETcB1RGsLiAr9DcTjPbtmljiA1/hk3flWTFi8+48PfqYJuG9r9kD/KoQyezTqFikSkR41x5ATw6lpqbawFqOf9hLGPwiaPX9IztATMyxmluCeofg= Received: by 10.65.177.14 with SMTP id e14mr5255759qbp; Thu, 05 Jan 2006 09:10:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.110.14 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Jan 2006 09:10:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 12:10:17 -0500 From: Matt Arnold To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: Two organizations In-Reply-To: <20060103085524.GX4087@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060102042644.GJ4087@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20060102173819.GL29659@miranda.org> <43B9C64B.5050805@lojban.org> <20060103085524.GX4087@chain.digitalkingdom.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 63 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: matt.mattarn@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board Am I correct that the board is done discussing this? If everybody has weighed in, may Robin and Arnt and I go to the beginner's list and lojban-list and discuss it there? -epkat On 1/3/06, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 07:33:15PM -0500, Robert LeChevalier wrote: > > Matt Arnold wrote: > > >>>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. > > >> > > >>Yes, I agree. > > > > > > There is a good reason that I have been discussing Arnt's > > > proposal with the LLG before going straight to the > > > beginners-list and lojban-list. This organization, if it is to > > > bear any resemblance to the International Esperanto Association, > > > > I don't think that is what others have in mind. LLG corresponds > > to the UEA. The new group corresponds to the rather disorganized > > community of Esperantists that identify themselves as such but are > > NOT voting members of any formal organization - that group is > > MUCH larger than the UEA. > > No, I really had the UEA in mind for the other org, although I > didn't know it until Broca pointed it out. Except without handling > money, of course. :-) A somewhat informal UEA, I suppose. > > [snip stuff that was way too much for me to read; hopefully others > are reading it] > > -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/ > > >