From arj@nvg.org Fri Nov 10 10:55:55 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:55:55 -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 1GibXU-0006Fq-Rm for llg-board@lojban.org; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:55:53 -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 D90C5947A0 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 19:55:13 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 19:55:13 +0100 (CET) From: Arnt Richard Johansen X-X-Sender: arj@hagbart.nvg.ntnu.no To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: LLG meeting during Logfest (Re: Re: LCS Board of Directors (fwd)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <4554A4BA.4000907@lojban.org> <20061110174122.GH23121@chain.digitalkingdom.org> <20061110181023.GD17734@chain.digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; 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 X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 262 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 On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Matt Arnold wrote: > Well, we're there, we might as well meet as long as we had everybody > there. I'm sorry, I thought I mentioned this on llg-members on October > 24, but all I did was bring up that we had eight of us present and ask > how big a percentage that was if we don't count inactive members. I > intended to broach the topic once I had that info, and then somehow I > got it into my head that it was all straightened out. > > I hope it's not too late to think about it. Does a meeting of the > membership have to be called to order by the President of the Board? > Geez, sorry. My bad. First of all, mea culpa for not paying attention to llg-members. But as I re-read it now, I see only the statement that there are going to be eight LLG members at Logfest. No notice of a meeting, no agenda, as is required by Article 3, Section 2 in the bylaws. Unfortunately, the notice has to be issued 15 days in advance, which means that it is too late to call a meeting on Logfest now. I don't understand what you mean by "we might as well meet as long as we had everybody there". Is there any particular business that needs to be conducted before the next AGM in June? If so, why does it need to happen at Logfest instead of by e-mail? I thought we stopped having business meetings in person because we got tired of having only a few people with lots of proxies on their hands. -- Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/ Clientside scripting has its place. Its place happens to be somewhere in the lower circles of Hell, but it has it. --heard on IRC