From lojbab@lojban.org Thu Mar 05 13:42:36 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:42:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from eastrmmtao101.cox.net ([68.230.240.7]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LfLKp-0003Sk-3l for llg-board@lojban.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:42:36 -0800 Received: from eastrmimpo03.cox.net ([68.1.16.126]) by eastrmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090305214225.XSKW15713.eastrmmtao101.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:42:25 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([70.187.235.94]) by eastrmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id PZiQ1b00h22sj6m02ZiQHx; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:42:25 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=wbiUy1uqjgoA:10 a=mRcMyuhkYd8A:10 a=zotffxztlUnyoJ2IvvgA:9 a=5JkDtRpgjKgFmqp0OTgA:7 a=PTD0j1dPC3jG7Oa--ucNLVLM-ccA:4 a=Dqp-bWOt5EsA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <49B0473D.2060508@lojban.org> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:42:21 -0500 From: Robert LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: llg-board@lojban.org Subject: [llg-board] Re: Spending money on getting people to penguicon. References: <20090305191021.GE27391@digitalkingdom.org> <49B03EEA.3050305@lojban.org> <20090305212839.GI27391@digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20090305212839.GI27391@digitalkingdom.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 476 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: lojbab@lojban.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board Robin Lee Powell wrote: >>I'm not sure I would vote no, especially since I recognize the names, >>and suspect that Robin could justify each based on their activity. But >>I hesitate about setting such a precedent. > > > I wasn't particularily planning to make this public. Since I believe that our books are open to any voting member by law (technically I am supposed to have a copy of the minutes and a proper financial report available here at our legal address for inspection), and potentially could be looked at by the IRS, that is NOT something we want to do. We can limit explicit notification to the membership, but the membership should be informed. Especially since this would be the largest chunk of money we've spent on anything but publications. lojbab