From arj@nvg.org Fri Nov 10 09:04:16 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Fri, 10 Nov 2006 09:04:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no ([129.241.210.67]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1GiZnP-0003j6-AD for llg-board@lojban.org; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 09:04:14 -0800 Received: from hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no (hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no [129.241.210.68]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sabre-wulf.nvg.ntnu.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C01794791 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:03:48 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:03:48 +0100 (CET) From: Arnt Richard Johansen X-X-Sender: arj@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: LCS Board of Directors (fwd) In-Reply-To: <4554A4BA.4000907@lojban.org> Message-ID: References: <4554A4BA.4000907@lojban.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-NVG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-NVG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: arj@nvg.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 249 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: arj@nvg.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board As you mentioned, we don't know yet if Sai wants the LLG's involvement or if he wants my involvement. If it is the former, we probably should let the next AGM decide -- and that may be too late for Sai. On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Robert LeChevalier wrote: >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Sai Emrys >> [...] >> As part of incorporating the Language Creation Conference into a >> formal nonprofit organization (California 501(c)(3)), we will need to >> have a board of directors. I'm inviting you to be on it. >> [...] >> > I see no particular advantage in LLG being a formal supporter of this > organization at this point. We aren't really trying to promote "conlanging" > per se. And we DO have a bias for a particular language, and *therefore* > against others. While we acknowledge that other conlangs exist, and are > interesting to many of our community, as an organization we cannot be > interested in them; their existence demands the sort of respect that we want > others to feel towards our language, but promoting their development > existence is outside of our organizational mission and charter. I can find no part of the bylaws that bar our participation in this organisation, but many that encourage it: "to investigate the nature of language and to determine the requirements for an artificially-engineered natural language", "to conduct and support experimental and scholarly research in these fields as they may bear upon the problems of artificial language development" (Article 2) > We also need no umbrella organization. Perhaps, but would it be harmful? > If they have a specific project whose purposes cohere with some of our goals, > I would have no problem with us working with them on that specific project. As I understand it, the primary purpose of the LCS is to conduct the Language Creation Conference, this year's version of which was a resounding success. I think it would be nice if Lojban had a presence there, and perhaps a formal tie with the LCS could give us special consideration of some sort. > I note that the organization makes no mention of auxlanging, and their > attitude towards that aspect of conlanging is unknown. In his original post, Sai mentioned that he wanted to get in touch with the Esperanto movement, implying that their attitude is favourable. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Du klickar bara på en ikon så SER DU DITT LOKALA NÄTVERK. -- Z mag@zine lovpriser Win95 i nr. 7/95